The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

**bulldogtragic** · 20-09-2009, 10:59 AM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by bornadog

Definitely a goal, just watch the replay, the ball is over the line and then touched by the Saints player. It was a great kick from Eagleton and we would have gone into the break 13 points up.

All this talk is making me paranoid of an AFL conspiracy. Surely this is all bad luck.

**LostDoggy** · 20-09-2009, 10:59 AM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Reiwoldlt didn't have a goal up until that moment, and was doing not much in my eyes.

Changed the game totally in my opinion.

**donnan** · 20-09-2009, 12:17 PM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by mighty_west

any bad decisions didn't lose us the game, plain & simple.

true true...

**Bulldog4life** · 20-09-2009, 12:32 PM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by bulldogtragic

All this talk is making me paranoid of an AFL conspiracy. Surely this is all bad luck.

Well the AFL has now got the Grand Final that I'm sure that they wanted.

**LostDoggy** · 20-09-2009, 02:17 PM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by Topdog

Agreed. 3 of their first 4 goals came from flat out incorrect decisions.

Whilst the umps didn't "cost" us the game, they certainly helped St Kilda to win.

And, amen to that!

**Scorlibo** · 20-09-2009, 04:02 PM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by mighty_west

Any bad decisions didn't lose us the game, plain & simple.

Yes they did. We lost by 7 points.

Riewoldt gets a free goal after receiving a free kick from the softest bump I've ever seen. This triggers some St. Kilda momentum on which they nab themselves another two goals.

This already accounts for the margin, but then as if anybody wasn't quite sure that we were robbed, you only need to look at the replay of the last goal - it was touched, very, very clearly by Bryza.

To summarise, the umpires turned what should have been a 10+ point win to us, into a 7 point win for St Kilda. We were robbed.

**LostDoggy** · 20-09-2009, 05:01 PM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by Scorlibo

Yes they did. We lost by 7 points.

Riewoldt gets a free goal after receiving a free kick from the softest bump I've ever seen. This triggers some St. Kilda momentum on which they nab themselves another two goals.

This already accounts for the margin, but then as if anybody wasn't quite sure that we were robbed, you only need to look at the replay of the last goal - it was touched, very, very clearly by Bryza.

To summarise, the umpires turned what should have been a 10+ point win to us, into a 7 point win for St Kilda. We were robbed.

It seemed though the last goal by Riewoldt was touched when I watch it again. But I could only really tell in slow motion. Do you think that would have been visible to the umpires in the game?

**bulldogtragic** · 20-09-2009, 05:06 PM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by arkie

It seemed though the last goal by Riewoldt was touched when I watch it again. But I could only really tell in slow motion. Do you think that would have been visible to the umpires in the game?

Not to defend them, unless there is a noise (which they wouldn't have heard) or a noticeable deflection it is near impossible for them to say it was touched. I couldn't watch the replay, but if you had to slow it right down to see a fingernail, then it's just more bad luck as opposed to a bad decision. But they made plenty of bad decisions anyway.

**LostDoggy** · 20-09-2009, 05:18 PM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by bulldogtragic

Not to defend them, unless there is a noise (which they wouldn't have heard) or a noticeable deflection it is near impossible for them to say it was touched. I couldn't watch the replay, but if you had to slow it right down to see a fingernail, then it's just more bad luck as opposed to a bad decision. But they made plenty of bad decisions anyway.

Yep I agree. I couldn't tell when it was at normal speed and at slow motion all you can see is I think Harbrow's fingers move when it comes off the boot of Riewoldt. At the end of the day it was probably touched, but very hard to call in a game. I still think the decisions made by the umpires had a major influence in the end result, but we should've taken our chances early. Hopefully we are better for this next season. Go dogs.

**Scorlibo** · 21-09-2009, 12:55 AM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by arkie

It seemed though the last goal by Riewoldt was touched when I watch it again. But I could only really tell in slow motion. Do you think that would have been visible to the umpires in the game?

It wouldn't have been visible enough to make a definitive call, but they did anyway, and their call was against us - it was almost as quickly decided upon as any other goal despite the scrambling nature of the goal and the pleads from Lakey and Morris.

**dog town** · 21-09-2009, 07:20 AM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

I know its pointless but did anyone notice the missed free at the throw in with 1:44 left on the clock? Hudson has been headlocked at the throw in but it is allowed to go on because of the stage of the game.

**LostDoggy** · 21-09-2009, 10:27 AM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Some interesting points made here.

Just the 2 goal umpireing decisions is enough to change the result to a 3 point win to us. Anyone who wants the AFL to adopt a video umpire for those tight decisions, this is the game to use! I agree that the last goal would have been too hard to see, I was more upset that our luck had given away again and the ball dropped at his feet.

As much as I want to put the blame solely on the umpires, I have been saying that the luck was all with the Saints.

1 last note - the deliberate OOB against Aker was a joke, he kicked the ball forward, he didn't even angle it towards the boundary, the ball just bounced that way.

**Mantis** · 21-09-2009, 10:31 AM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by nawrocki

1 last note - the deliberate OOB against Aker was a joke, he kicked the ball forward, he didn't even angle it towards the boundary, the ball just bounced that way.

The ball bounced end over end... He kicked for touch and got the desired result.

**LostDoggy** · 21-09-2009, 10:36 AM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by Mantis

The ball bounced end over end... He kicked for touch and got the desired result.

True, but the ball can bounce in any direction, it could have bounced back into play, a player cannot control the way the ball bounces, he can only try to have it bounce the way he wanted.

The major problem I have with the rule is that it has to be a players sole intention to go to the boundry line for it to be a free kick. So if that was his sole intention, why didn't he just handball the ball where he was? Why did he kick the ball forward 50m towards his teams goal, if all he wanted was a ball in? Akers main intention was to get the ball forward 50m, it going OOB was a bonus result.

**The Coon Dog** · 21-09-2009, 10:56 AM

Re: The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Originally posted by nawrocki

Akers main intention was to get the ball forward 50m, it going OOB was a bonus result.

Aker's only intention was to get the ball out of bounds. A free kick every day of the week.

The Lake 'Free' and Other 'Frees'

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment